The Experiment Societyexperimentsociety.org⌕Get involved
Basic IncomeCash transferPositive

GiveDirectly — Large-Scale Basic Income in Rural Kenya

GiveDirectly / Princeton / MIT / UC Berkeley · Siaya County, Kenya · 2016

Summary

The GiveDirectly Kenya experiment is the most rigorous test of basic income ever conducted in a low-income setting, and its findings upend two central assumptions of development economics. First, recipients do not reduce work when given unconditional cash — they work similar hours and invest in more productive assets and activities. Second, the benefits are not contained to the recipient household: the local multiplier effect means that control-village households within the treated area also became richer, as money circulated through local markets. The experiment reveals that unconditional cash transfers can function like a capital injection that grows the local economy, not merely a redistribution of existing resources. The 12-year time horizon will eventually answer the question no shorter experiment can: do the effects persist, or do they fade as the transfer becomes a long-run baseline?

Research question

"Does a long-run unconditional basic income — large enough to lift recipients above extreme poverty — improve consumption, assets, and psychological wellbeing in a low-income rural setting?"

Methodology

Intervention

The largest basic income RCT ever conducted. GiveDirectly randomly assigned 295 villages to treatment or control. Within treatment villages, all households received one of three variants: long-term (monthly $22.50/month for 12 years), short-term (lump sum equivalent of 2 years of long-term), or short-term monthly. Comparison villages received nothing. The $22.50 monthly transfer represented approximately 75% of baseline household consumption.

Assignment

Village-level randomized controlled trial; 295 villages randomized; outcomes measured via household surveys and satellite imagery; 2016–ongoing (12-year program with published results from first 2 years)

Sample size

~21,000 recipients across treatment villages; ~9,000 in control villages

Primary outcome

Consumption expenditure; assets (livestock, home quality); psychological wellbeing; food security; hours worked; local economic activity (general equilibrium effects)

Effect estimate

Consumption: +30% vs. baseline; assets: +40% in asset values; food security: significantly improved; psychological wellbeing: large positive effects on stress and happiness; hours worked: no reduction; local economic spillovers: significant — control villages within treated areas also showed consumption increases (~$2.50 for every $1 transferred, via multiplier effects)

Decision

GiveDirectly has become the largest basic income funder in history; results used by GiveWell to inform cost-effectiveness rankings; local economic multiplier finding influenced debate about macroeconomic effects of cash programs; US and European basic income proponents cite GiveDirectly as benchmark evidence; ongoing 12-year data collection will provide the first evidence on truly long-run effects

Result

Positive

Consumption: +30% vs. baseline; assets: +40% in asset values; food security: significantly improved; psychological wellbeing: large positive effects on stress and happiness; hours worked: no reduction; local economic spillovers: significant — control villages within treated areas also showed consumption increases (~$2.50 for every $1 transferred, via multiplier effects)

Evidence strength

Strong

Randomized controlled trial with large sample.

Replication status

Open for replication

Institution

GiveDirectly / Princeton / MIT / UC Berkeley

Location

Siaya County, Kenya

Year

2016

Policy area

Basic Income

Mechanism

Cash transfer

Featured in evidence syntheses

More from these institutions

Other trials of this mechanism

Cite this entry

GiveDirectly / Princeton / MIT / UC Berkeley. (2016). GiveDirectly — Large-Scale Basic Income in Rural Kenya. The Experiment Society Registry. Retrieved from https://www.experimentsociety.org/registry/givedirectly-kenya-ubi (primary report: https://www.nber.org/papers/w26600)

Citation network

Cited by 3 other entries in the registry

Cross-references

Adjacent experiments — same domain, parallel pilots, or alternative mechanisms.

Related experiments

Stockton, CA, USA · 2019

Stockton SEED — Guaranteed Income Pilot

Positive

Finland · 2017

Finland Basic Income Experiment

Mixed

Manitoba, Canada · 1974

Manitoba Mincome — Guaranteed Annual Income

Positive

Mentioned in the Dispatch

Issue 12 · June 4, 2026

What Stockton showed.

The first mayor-funded guaranteed income pilot in the US ran for two years and produced clear results. Why the debate continued anyway.

Open for replication

Could your jurisdiction test this?

This finding has not yet been independently replicated. A replication in a new context — a different city, country, or population — is one of the highest-value contributions to the evidence base. If your team could host a replication, we can help with study design, sample-size estimation, and analysis.

Propose a replication →What does "open for replication" mean?
← Back to registryWhat the evidence shows →